It was a core for core comparison. 8 cores vs 8 cores. And all signs are pointing to this being a midrange Ryzen chip out competing the very top of the line chip from Intel.

Single core performance would at worst be on par with the Intel 8700k to even compete with the i9-900k. Which is pretty much what each version of Ryzen has done to catch up to NVIDIA.

Ryzen 1700 single core = Intel 4000
Ryzen 2700 single core = Intel 6000
Ryzen 3700 single core = Intel 8000

I assume the clock speeds on the Ryzen CPU were higher than the Intel's stock speeds, but the point is, with Zen 2 you can get $600 Intel performance on the Ryzen 3700x which should be priced $400 or less.

And if rumors are true then the CPU is actually the Ryzen 3600x, since the rumored 3700x has more CPU cores than 8C/16T.

Honest question. How do you question the core performance without knowing that the test was run intentionally on the 8 core vs 8 core to showcase the core for core performance? like seriously

lol...good point...my next build might be ryzen....im waiting for a good gap between my actual 6700k(4.6ghz) and my next cpu....not sold on spending more than 400/500 $ can for a processor.

Intel will likely have the single core win with their new release and possibly get their core/thread counts on par with AMD with the move to 10nm, although I don't expect a huge difference between the CPUs, until Intels moves over to 7nm as well. I'd say we're looking at around 10% - 15% more performance.

However, this battle will come down to price. Intel can't be 10% better, while costing $100 more, for once we might get CPU prices back down to reasonable levels with great performance being offered in both the mid and high range.

The i5 series has surpassed the last of the 4c/8t i7's (i7 7700k) already, and in the next 1 - 2 years the i3 series will surpass it as well, the same should be said for the Ryzen 3000 series.